MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7030099810

NEET Statistics Quarterly Brief: July to September 2016

2016· other· en· W7030099810 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Education Resource Archive (University College London) · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPercentage pointQuarter (Canadian coin)Age groupsStatistical analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The proportion of young people not in education, employment or training (NEET) remained broadly flat for the 16-24 age group.Within this, there was a fall in the NEET rate for the 16-18 age group and a rise for the 19-24 age group. 1 The 16-18 NEET rate was 8.7%, down 1.5 percentage points from the comparable quarter in 2015.This change from 2015 was not statistically significant.Over the same period the 19-24 NEET rate rose by 0.8 percentage points (to 16.2%) and the overall 16-24 rate remained broadly flat (rising slightly by 0.1 percentage points to 13.9%).Neither of these changes were statistically significant.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1890.247

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Education Resource Archive (University College London)French-language works237,207